Posted - 2006.10.27 01:19:00 -
[181]
As I said in another post, Drake is comparible to the cerb, in fact all the tier 2 BC are comparible to the HAC they most resemble in each race, thats all except the Myr, compare it to a Ishtar, all I can say is

CaldariFerox and Drake, they both get a shield res bonus (I thought the tier 2's were more 'damage dealers'?)

IFd honestly prefer this, you need a good balance between DPS and staying power.

Originally by:Blind ManThe Drake also gets another mid and high over the Ferox, making it a better tank anyway.

That is very true and it seems to me like it is with the intent of it actually having more of an EWAR capability.

Originally by:Blind Man

Drake also gets 7 launchers and a ROF bonus, compared to 5 rails and a optimal bonus on the Ferox. Maybe change the Ferox to have less missiles and 7 guns? the Vulture would also need this change.

I donFt really think that this would be a good idea imho. The problem here then becomes that all these people could potentially have trouble because of the following reasons: a) donFt want to fly a drake and already fly a ferox with missiles b) prefer missiles and are already trained for command modulesc) those who primarily use the ferox and canFt afford the drake as soon as they release it and they change the feroxFs fitting capabilites

Originally by:Blind Man

I also thing the Drake just does too much damage compared to the Nighthawk. If the Nighthawk uses anything but kinetic missiles, the drake will out damage it. There needs to be a much bigger gap between T1 and T2 if you look at the amount of skills and ISK required for a command ship.

The damage difference seems fine to me, but you have to remember the purpose of those ships (Nighthawk, Vulture, and even the Ferox) is to run the Command Links. Theese three ships all have specialized purposes that makes them important. You canFt just expect every ship to be equal, some will serve a specific purpose.

I donFt know enough and havenFt looked at the others enough to be able to make any kind of educated or intelligent assessment of them other than to remind everyone that the command ships are meant to serve a specific purpose regardless of damage output.

Posted - 2006.10.27 05:13:00 -
[184]
The only logical reason I can see for the Myrs pathetic drone bay is CCP not wishing it to use heavy drones.

Now that being said, WHY shouldnt it be able to use 5 heavys? doing the math this will only put it on par with the damage potential of the other tier 2 BCs, so whats the problem?

So lets say it can now field 5 heavys, those 5 heavys are pretty easy to kill, especialy with the fights being made longer now, so it realy needs to be able to replace lost drones easily right? surely this is only fair as we cant exactly shoot the guns/launchers off the other ships.

So now we have worked out that 5 heavys is in fact quite fair, and it realy needs to be able to have multiple waves of drones so it doesnt become completely useless after a few have been shot, also if it warps out it instantly loses all its damage.

So, why cant it have a Ishtar sized drone bay? why would this be so bad? why cant it have 5 heavys, 5 meds and 5 lights in its bay?

Realy not understanding why some people are so anti big drone bay for what is a dedicated drone ship.

s said above all the other BCs are comparible to there HAC brothers, Cerb vs Drake, according to most numbers etc the Drake is on par if not BETTER than the Cerb, so why cant the Myr be more like a Ishtar than the Vexor its more currently like atm?

Originally by:Karen DarkFirst yes i fly Caldari and almost nothing else. Second why not put a MWD on a missile ship? So a MWD gives you a big sig it doesnt matter what weapons you are useing. The heavy assault missiles have fight time of 2 seconds base. Heck all someone has to do is orbit you at 10-11ks and wear you down cause you wont catch them and you wont be able to run cuz they will have scramed you to death.

Once agin this was an IDEA nothing more.Thanks for being a asshat and contributing nothing useful to this thread.

Oh Jesus *****F'ing christ...

HAM's are SHORT RANGE WEAPONS. They're the missile equivalent of blasters. What you've jsut said is like a Thorax pilot going "omg, my basters can't hit the enemy if they stay outsde my range, boostkthnx". You don't HAVE to use HAM's on the drake, heavy missiles can still be used on this ship. Getting into range to do this can be accomplished in many ways, web and hope hte come to you, AB/MWD and goto them or have a gangmate tackle them down for you. If you can't do any of those three, fit normal heavy missiles. Your DPS will still be something fierce.

"Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion."-Sun Tzu

Originally by:NebuliThe only logical reason I can see for the Myrs pathetic drone bay is CCP not wishing it to use heavy drones.

Now that being said, WHY shouldnt it be able to use 5 heavys? doing the math this will only put it on par with the damage potential of the other tier 2 BCs, so whats the problem?

So lets say it can now field 5 heavys, those 5 heavys are pretty easy to kill, especialy with the fights being made longer now, so it realy needs to be able to replace lost drones easily right? surely this is only fair as we cant exactly shoot the guns/launchers off the other ships.

So now we have worked out that 5 heavys is in fact quite fair, and it realy needs to be able to have multiple waves of drones so it doesnt become completely useless after a few have been shot, also if it warps out it instantly loses all its damage.

So, why cant it have a Ishtar sized drone bay? why would this be so bad? why cant it have 5 heavys, 5 meds and 5 lights in its bay?

Realy not understanding why some people are so anti big drone bay for what is a dedicated drone ship.

s said above all the other BCs are comparible to there HAC brothers, Cerb vs Drake, according to most numbers etc the Drake is on par if not BETTER than the Cerb, so why cant the Myr be more like a Ishtar than the Vexor its more currently like atm?

Posted - 2006.10.27 06:55:00 -
[187]Edited by: Heelay Ashrum on 27/10/2006 06:55:23Any dev comment on myr problem? Just a " we know there is a problem with myrmidon" should be good.

I know those ships are just in testing, so be aware for a problem it's already a good step. :)on the other way if u say "no and again no to bigger drone bay", we know that we must suggest something else ( brutix like gunboat? )

OK ok, no need to flame me, I was under the impression Drake had more dps than other BC's and was overpowered. I guess I let the whines get through to me... I dont want to swim in guns, I use missiles and missiles only, and am really looking forward to the drake

This is not an attemp to flame this guy..but isnt this true of most, of the blather that flys around these forum's......

So you just thought it out DPS'ed all the other BC's and so it should be nerfed????????????????????????????????? even tho you actually had no real idea! just unhelpful and unconstuctive input! This kind of garbage is rampant on these forums!

Under optimal conditions for each ship the Drake Might hit 70-80% the raw dps of the hurricain or harbinger..and that is using the new short range heavy assult missles.

Yes it can mount a great tank ..but with its bonus IT must be sheild tanked and it is still the slowest least agile teir II BC.

My fave so far is the Hurricain.......that thing has got BMF spray painted on the side and will be come the norm for pirating prolly speed, amour tank, damage++, mid for EW pwnage and scramble ouch i love it

Myrm.......prolly need's some love TBH even if it had a 125m3 bay it still screams "pwnd my drones and u will pwnd me"...... and whats the deal with the large sig radius???

Because the Myrmidon relies on it's drones as it's primary source of damage, it needs that source to be both sufficient and reliable. Item #3 is there simply because it's an inferior bonus to the resistance one.

Because the Myrmidon relies on it's drones as it's primary source of damage, it needs that source to be both sufficient and reliable. Item #3 is there simply because it's an inferior bonus to the resistance one.

IMO, this *will* make the Myr a bit overpowered - and will incite more Caldari whining.I think that there is no reason to add turret hardpoints to it - not enough grid for them.Resistance bonus is more suitable for an Amarr ship rather then for a Gallente one.But the drone bay *needs* to be fixed.I think it should be 150 to 200 m3, combined with the current 10% drone bonus.Even a 125 m3 bay will be an improvement... Though a marginal one.

Posted - 2006.10.27 09:16:00 -
[194]
the myr looks underpowered, but giving it much more than a 100m3 dronebay will make it overpowered, most bs's hav dronebays 125m3 or less, the drone carrying cruisers get 75m3. id say keep the 100m3 dronebay but make the bonuses 10%dronedamage and hp, and 5m3 to dronebay per level. then change the slot layout to 5/6/6 to favor tanking and ewar over turret damage.

Posted - 2006.10.27 09:19:00 -
[195]
Well I really don't understand all the crying over the Drake..

For one, don't compare it to the Ferox which is quite possibly one of the worst designed ships in the game if you ask me. 5 Turrets? Please, it should have 6, maybe 7.. 5 launcher slots? Why.. total schizo layout, I am guessing CCP added the launcher slots so it could be a dual purpose ship and appease to people who go caldari->missiles and wanted to be able to use it.. with the Drake this is no longer needed, make the Ferox a more capable railboat, get rid of those launcher slots add more turrets.

The Drake is obviously a great ship, I don't see why people are complaining too much about 7x heavy assault launchers on it, the range is actually pretty bad and the Drake is hardly a speed demon, in fact it's pretty damn slow in general, ~400m/s with a 10mn afterburner II?

I don't think a missile velocity bonus would be good for the Drake, it would just make hvy assault missiles more powerful on it, extending the range a good amount, the Drake being slow and hvy assault missiles being slow kinda balances it out.

Posted - 2006.10.27 09:27:00 -
[196]
you don't listen do you? you all keep whining on for you uber boat while tactly ignoring every point made against it. rather than attempt to use the ship with a modicum of skill you insist on attempting to make it into an ishtar/HAC comparisons make me laugh,there is no reason why it should be better or worse than the HAC, it should be DIFFERENT. which it is. The brutix DPS comparison is also ridiculous, the brutix is you high DPS ship, comparable to the drake+hurricane+harbringer. There is absolutly no reason why the mrymydon should approach the DPS of the highest damage non-BS in the game and still be able to fit 3 NOS (a key part of this ship which many people don't seem to get). Again, because you ignore it -these ships have been specifically designed with rigs in mind, your drones will increase their effectivness dramatically, just as the drake has a high cpu to fit the launcher upgrades. Having said that I don't think an upgrade to 150m3 is neccesarily over powered for the loss of a high slot/turret

Posted - 2006.10.27 09:51:00 -
[197]
Will all the flamers and trolls please shut the **** up and let the people having constructive conversations get on with it.

Several people say they have tested the myrmidon and that they found it weak. Having looked at the stats (and having a gallente alt who flies vexors) I agree with them.

It's not really a substantial upgrade from the vexor at all.

Everyone seems happy with the stats on the Amarr and Minmatar ships, they are worried that the Caldari may be too strong and the Gallente too weak.

There was a constructive discussion of whether that was true or not, by how much it was too weak/strong and what could be done to fix it going on. That in case you missed it is why the Devs made this thread. They _wanted_ balance feedback.

Now I was looking at how much stronger the Drake is than the Ferox and thinking that the Drake seems too strong, but there is the very good point made that the Ferox is a very weak battlecruiser - so maybe the Drake is fine and the Ferox needs some work. It would certainly make sense now we have a missile boat available to drop its missile hardpoints and increase the turret ones.

For the Gallente one - I've seen several good suggestions, but I don't like the idea of increasing the number of drones controlled at once simply because CCP reduced the number of drones in the first place to reduce lag. Nothing smaller than carriers really should be able to field swarms of drones.

Originally by:Karen DarkA MWD on a misile ship? You apparently can't fly one. Drop resistances for a MWD.. lol, anyone who ACTUALLY fly caldari see any problem ?

First yes i fly Caldari and almost nothing else. Second why not put a MWD on a missile ship? So a MWD gives you a big sig it doesnt matter what weapons you are useing. The heavy assault missiles have fight time of 2 seconds base. Heck all someone has to do is orbit you at 10-11ks and wear you down cause you wont catch them and you wont be able to run cuz they will have scramed you to death.

Once agin this was an IDEA nothing more.Thanks for being a asshat and contributing nothing useful to this thread.

Karen, if you're refering to standard misiles I believe the base is approx. 35km of range, and in a smaller ship that you usually have standards fitted, range isn't so much of a problem. As for the BC class, it uses exclusively Heavy Misiles, which with skills and all are good to at least 60+ km not to mention up to 70-80km. So I really think this idea on your end is a bad one, and it will not have any implications in the game. It certainly has very limited application on a caldari ship anyway.

MWD is used primarily on a short ranged high damage ships to get quickly to target. Caldari doesn't have 1 ship that is good at that, especially not their misile based BC!

5% resistance is a much more viable bonus and one that can be of use!

In your rush to troll and flame you missed a very important fact. Heavy Assault Missiles are very short range, is the missile equivelant of a blaster boat.

Having said that Caldari are not really about fast maneouverable ships so I don't like the suggestion - that does not excuse your response though. Stop making all Caldari look like rude and arrogant idiots and start listening and participating instead of flaming and obstructing.

Harbinger is not as ill recieved as is Abbadon, but still it's not up to par with it's peers. I propose that you redesign it as a mixed laser-drone platform. Not as drone oriented as it's Gallente counterpart, Harbinger will require usage of lasers to compete with it's peers (ie Nos+Drone combo not feasible). Here it is, plain and simple:

Harbinger6-5-775m3 drone bay6 turret hardpoints

Bonuses:10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret capacitor use per skill level10% bonus to drone hitpoints and damage per skill level

NOS + drone combo is not feasible. On On the Harbinger it would be simply outclassed by Myrmidion running same setup. Focus is on combining damage with some versatility, something Amarr lacks atm. We don't need another turret ship. We don't need another turret ship.

And as to why Harbinger is not up to par. Compare with Hurricane using some viable setups (using Kali ammo stats)

So what does the Harbinger sacrifice for that paltry dmg advantage? Hurricane can fit MAR II + 1600mm Tungsten + 10mn MWD II + Med Nos II. Harbinger only has room for MAR II and 10MN AB II. No room for plate or med NOS. So Hurricane tanks better, goes faster, much more cap, much less vulnerable to tracking disruptors, and has smaller sig radius. Tbh why would you choose to fly Harbinger?

Now it can fit a 1600mm plate, but it does less DPS than Hurricane. Whether you choose to fit MWD or AB, it still can't fill it's last high slot with a Med NOS. And it still has less cap available compared to Hurricane. Simply outclassed.

Originally by:fade Thorthe myr looks underpowered, but giving it much more than a 100m3 dronebay will make it overpowered, most bs's hav dronebays 125m3 or less, the drone carrying cruisers get 75m3.

Actually, giving it more than 100m3 dronebay will in no way make it overpowered, it will just put it on the same line as the other tier2 bcs.

Consider that (unlike the Vexor and Dom) the Myrmidon gets no damage bonus to anything other than the drones. It needs 5 x heavy drones to compete with the other new battlecruisers, especially considering how easy the drones are to kill with Kali longer combat times.

As is, with medium drones the Myrmidon has equal DPS to the Vexor, making it useless; why fly an expensive BC when you get the same damage from a cheap t1 cruiser? With heavies it is only slightly better than a Vexor, and if even one of those drones is killed it's game over -- the ship has no room for spares.

Maybe the devs thought the ship should use mediums (that would explain the drone bay, 100m3 is nice for two waves of mediums). Problem is, medium drones are totally inadaquate for BCs as the primary damage source.

Vexor: 75m3Myrmidon: 100m3Ishtar: 375m3 (with HAC V)Dominix: 375m3

See the problem? The Myrmidon is pretty close to Vexor-level, when it should be closer to Ishtar/Dom. All the other tier2 BCs are fairly close to their HAC counterparts is power, the Myrmidon is so far behind the Ishtar as a drone boat is isn't even funny. For example, the Ishtar gets multiple waves of heavy drones *and* turret damage bonus.

In light of the above, how on earth would having 5 heavy drones (with room for a few spares) and no turret damage bonus make the Myrmidon overpowered?

Posted - 2006.10.27 10:55:00 -
[202]
Some ppl what to see a damage bonus for the Myrmidon. Did you ever tryed to fit it? With a dual rep fitting it cant get a injector (must have with the long fights), 3 med NOS and 5 electrons on. It simply dont got the grid. Even with diminishings it's to low on CPU to fit anything usefull in the med slots.

That leads to another odd problem. We have some BC that can go full tank with tec 2 gear for both tank and guns (there is no need for tec 2 scrams and the like and you would not be able to go tec 2 here anyway because of CPU issues). Whereby others can't. In some cases (harbinger) they are even to low on CPU to go full gank.

So my question is now: Is there any real reason why some BC are able to fit tec 2 and others dont?

So what does the Harbinger sacrifice for that paltry dmg advantage? Hurricane can fit MAR II + 1600mm Tungsten + 10mn MWD II + Med Nos II. Harbinger only has room for MAR II and 10MN AB II. No room for plate or med NOS. So Hurricane tanks better, goes faster, much more cap, much less vulnerable to tracking disruptors, and has smaller sig radius. Tbh why would you choose to fly Harbinger?

Now it can fit a 1600mm plate, but it does less DPS than Hurricane. Whether you choose to fit MWD or AB, it still can't fill it's last high slot with a Med NOS. And it still has less cap available compared to Hurricane. Simply outclassed.

I had the same problem with my Harbringer if i fit heavy pulse i only have enough pg to fit ab and a single MAR t2 or 1 plate 800mm but SAR with AWU4. I cant understand why Tux dont see amarr fits are really hard to do in nearly every ship(no T2) :S

I had the same problem with my Harbringer if i fit heavy pulse i only have enough pg to fit ab and a single MAR t2 or 1 plate 800mm but SAR with AWU4. I cant understand why Tux dont see amarr fits are really hard to do in nearly every ship(no T2) :S

Hmm, managed to get on the test server last night and fitted a harbinger with 7 Heavy Pulse II's, 10MN AB II, Selection of EW, MAR II, 3 HSII's and t2 energized membranes. Had about 150 grid left over after that (to use for the grid increase on turrets demanded by Rigs!).

Gallente;I see no problem with the gallente battlecruisers, Brutix is blaster, Myrmidon is a drone boat.People are complaining about the lack of drone space in the Myrmidon (waa waaa waaaa I cannot fit 5 heavies and have more heavies for backup) to put it short anyway But this ship has more tank than the smaller version (Vexor), and more mid slot versatility like the bigger version (Dominix/Ishtar/Eos), and more high slots for nos and guns and whatever. I really see this as being a bigger Vexor and a smaller Dominix. If you were going to boost it, more powergrid/CPU and maybe 1 or 2 extra turret points.

Caldari;Drake seems nasty but why the hell does it have more damage and more tank than the ferox? Drake needs to be ballanced I think, basically lose its resistance bonus, replace with missile velocity. Ferox therefore remains the tanker. Ferox/Vulture also needs more turret points at reduced missile points.

Amarr;Prophecy is still an uber tanker and its damage isnt too poor either. Harbinger is just like the Minmatar Hurricane, the layout is just dam fine, and very PVPy Obviously will suffer lack of tank when fitted with a full rack of heavy pulse, which balances it out, looking at the Harbinger, I am going to train t2 medium lasers up too

Minmatar;I dont really like the Cyclone, its very versatile but it just doesnt want to solo PVP , its heavy on cap cos of its active tank, and really does need an extra medium at the expensive of a low.Hurricane therefore is just a damned fine ship, ROF and damage bonus like Rupture, but with more damage and tank. I just like it, I can see myself happily pvping in this ship for the rest of my time playing EvE tbh :)

Originally by:AramendelIMO the harbringer is ok, *exept* that it needs 1 less high and 1 more low.

so you want they take out one turret and less pg for more cpu? nice! obviously you arent amarr if you want they nerf it lol. There is no way the ship dont have an utility high slot since all bc tier2 ships have it. They current dps balance is based on drones

I had the same problem with my Harbringer if i fit heavy pulse i only have enough pg to fit ab and a single MAR t2 or 1 plate 800mm but SAR with AWU4. I cant understand why Tux dont see amarr fits are really hard to do in nearly every ship(no T2) :S

Hmm, managed to get on the test server last night and fitted a harbinger with 7 Heavy Pulse II's, 10MN AB II, Selection of EW, MAR II, 3 HSII's and t2 energized membranes. Had about 150 grid left over after that (to use for the grid increase on turrets demanded by Rigs!).

My AW upgrades is currently at level 4 though.

and your cap last enough long with only a MAR and no cap booster? Do you know hurricane can fit 1600mm plate + MAR and do nearly same dps than harbringer? So their guns dont use cap and can tank better?

with ab you dont dictate the range. Without cap booster you will be out of cap in nearly no time with no plate on setup its much less armor than others bc

do you know to let your MAR t2 rep as much as a 1600mm plate the fight need last 140seconds to be equal? 1600mm plate gives around 5000HP mar t2 reps 35.5hp/s do maths If focused medium pulse t2 in a harbringer werent that bad in dps then would be no problem but they arent as good as 220mm fitted in a hurricane

Originally by:Sniserso you want they take out one turret and less pg for more cpu? nice! obviously you arent amarr if you want they nerf it lol. There is no way the ship dont have an utility high slot since all bc tier2 ships have it. They current dps balance is based on drones

It cannot use the utility high slot (which is pretty much limited for nos anyway) due to grid issues in either case. And just because all tier 2 BCs currently have one does not mean all *have* to have one. For the tier 1 BCs all exept the Brutix have one too. Did not stop the Brutix having 7 turrets & 7 highs.

Typically amarr ships have 1 more low than other ships of the same class, this is not the case for the tier 2 BCs. And for the harbringer 1 more low would be far more useful than 1 non-turret high.

Originally by:Sniserso you want they take out one turret and less pg for more cpu? nice! obviously you arent amarr if you want they nerf it lol. There is no way the ship dont have an utility high slot since all bc tier2 ships have it. They current dps balance is based on drones

It cannot use the utility high slot (which is pretty much limited for nos anyway) due to grid issues in either case. And just because all tier 2 BCs currently have one does not mean all *have* to have one. For the tier 1 BCs all exept the Brutix have one too. Did not stop the Brutix having 7 turrets & 7 highs.

Typically amarr ships have 1 more low than other ships of the same class, this is not the case for the tier 2 BCs. And for the harbringer 1 more low would be far more useful than 1 non-turret high.

if you cant use the utility slot then you are agree with me and there isnt enough powergrid

COPYRIGHT NOTICEEVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.